Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kirsty Ashton

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete. -- RoySmith (talk) 22:12, 15 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Kirsty Ashton

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

This is a very nice story but my searches found no better coverage with the following being the best results: here, here, here, here and here. At best, this would be best mentioned elsewhere but there's no good target. Pinging editors Smsarmad, Titch32, Djembayz and Mr Stephen. SwisterTwister talk 23:48, 31 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Comment The best news stories are probably linked at [1]. I think this article is marginal at best. Parts of it are a close copy of [2]. Mr Stephen (talk) 21:10, 1 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:18, 4 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:18, 4 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:18, 4 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:18, 4 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Keep The nominator has shown us there are books written about her and multiple news sources. Article needs copyedit, not deletion. Megalibrarygirl (talk) 18:33, 4 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I've done a quick copy-edit to remove the unverifiable and promotional text. --Slashme (talk) 21:20, 6 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete She has written two autobiographies which are available online through self-publishing services. While this technically agrees with "there are books written about her", they are not independent sources. She's a media darling with an MBA for fundraising, but I cannot see that she will have lasting notability. --Slashme (talk) 21:04, 6 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, —☮JAaron95 ^Talk 10:36, 7 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Weak Delete - This is a borderline case, and she is indeed someone's who's received royal honors. However, the sporadic news coverage that I've seen involving here has been brief mentions by hometown news publications. She's written two books, but being an author doesn't make you necessarily notable. Getting major reviews of your work is the key. I feel inclined to delete the article. CoffeeWithMarkets (talk) 03:14, 15 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Delete I'm included to say that quality sources are not established here. At least not the point I'd recommend for WP:ANYBIO. Mkdw ^talk 03:21, 15 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Tough decision, but really there is little of note other than local coverage and the MBE which is awarded in droves.Derek Andrews (talk) 11:38, 15 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom and above editors. Nothing but brief mentions. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 13:27, 15 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Per above users, there are only brief mentions in the sources that are cited. Also, the books written about her aren't independent. MrWooHoo (talk) 22:11, 15 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.